Andy Murray: The LOSER among the Winners

[Luxilon Borg]

Andy Murray is clearly part of the historic Big Four.

But he is the LOSER of the bunch. The black sheep of an elite litter.

UNLIKE Roger, Rafa, and Nole, he has to play two opponents every time he steps on court. Himself and the person across the net.

I posted here several years ago about his negative body language, jaw boning, body part grabbing, whining, and pitiful soliloquies on court absolutely affected his performance, and I was met with skepticism. Every single expert observer, Gilbert, P.MAC. Cahill etc says it is a massive factor.

He has lost more major and masters finals than all the others, and for good reason.

There are several technical reasons as well: Second serve, predictable hook cross court forehand, court positioning etc.

 

[El Dude]

Yes, it is a combination of his attitude but also the simple fact that he is not as talented a player as the Bigger Three.

All that said, too much is made of Andy's "worst of the best" status. He is also the "best of the rest" - the best player on tour other than those three for the last almost decade, at a time when three of the five or so greatest players of the Open Era were playing. There is no shame in that. He is the Jim Courier or Guillermo Vilas of his era.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Yes, it is a combination of his attitude but also the simple fact that he is not as talented a player as the Bigger Three.

All that said, too much is made of Andy's "worst of the best" status. He is also the "best of the rest" - the best player on tour other than those three for the last almost decade, at a time when three of the five or so greatest players of the Open Era were playing. There is no shame in that. He is the Jim Courier or Guillermo Vilas of his era.

Courier and Vilas were not in nearly as many Slam and Masters finals. If anything they over achieved.

 

[nehmeth]

Without getting into too much psychology...

The kid grew up in an untenable marriage where there was a lot of strife before there was a divorce. Then the shooting of his school chums. When you're growing up and spending all your free time on a tennis court, where are you going to let out all that internal turmoil? On the court.

I'm not an Andy fan, but I do feel badly for him when he goes mental out there. Can he somehow move past it? To this point in his career he hasn't. Maybe becoming a Dad and having fresh perspective will silence some of those demons.

 

[El Dude]

Well, different eras so different Slam contexts. For one, there's the court homogeneity. I think part of the consistency of the current top players - the Big Four, mainly - is that the courts are more similar than they were in the past. Compare, for instance, the Slam records of the Big Four to that of Pete Sampras, just 20 years ago. Pete was prone to the occasional first week loss at a Slam, even at the AO or USO.

But yeah, I do think Andy is probably a better player relative to the current field than Courier and Vilas were for most of their careers. His 2-7 record in Slam finals is one of the worst percentages (22%) of the Open Era. Actually, among players with five or more finals, only Andy Roddick's 1-4 (20%) is worse.

But again, this might have more to do with the greatness of Roger, Rafa, and Novak than it does Andy being a choker. Andy's relationship to Novak in particular is actually somewhat similar to Roddick's to Federer.

 

[El Dude]

nehmeth, a question for you (or anyone): If Andy had a better mental game, how many more Slams do you think he would have won? I can give him maybe 1 or 2 more, but probably not more than that. I just don't think he is as good as the other three.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

nehmeth, a question for you (or anyone): If Andy had a better mental game, how many more Slams do you think he would have won? I can give him maybe 1 or 2 more, but probably not more than that. I just don't think he is as good as the other three.

I would say a minimum of 4 more.

 

[nehmeth]

nehmeth, a question for you (or anyone): If Andy had a better mental game, how many more Slams do you think he would have won? I can give him maybe 1 or 2 more, but probably not more than that. I just don't think he is as good as the other three.

Think of it this way ED, if Andy had been able to get a better grip on the things he struggles with, he would have been more coachable, probably more amenable to changing the things he needed to in his game... and when pressed he wouldn't feel the need to go back to his "safe place" as the pusher.

He may have won at least two, but that's the sad thing, we will never know.

 

[dante1976]

Andy's biggest problem is his mental inferiority on big points/matches compared to other 3
Technically he is maybe 5-10% (tops) worse than his archenemies (half of that goes to his 2nd serve) but mentally he's stuck at "Novak's 2010"
That's why he have "only" 9 finals and "only" 2 wins.
And he got lucky to have Ivan helping him snatch those 2 GS titles and OGM 'cause he didn't mentally collapse in those matches (quite contrary behavior to his "past 2013" game). All in all great career but still unlucky to have 3 ATG's in his time alongside obvious "mental block" when playing them all (except those 3 times... against Djoko in slams and Fed on Olympics).

 

[El Dude]

Good stuff, dante1976 - I like the Novak 2010 analogy. I think that is basically right. And I also agree that Andy is about 90-95% of the player the others are.

Out of curiosity, I wanted to see which players had the largest "Slam Final Shares" during the Age of Novak (2011-16). That includes 21 Slams.

Slam Finals: 2011-16
16 Djokovic (76.2%)
9 Nadal (42.9%)
7 Murray (33%)
5 Federer (23.8%)
2 Wawrinka (9.5%)
1 Cilic (4.8%)
1 Nishikori (4.8%)
1 Ferrer (4.8%)

Slam Wins: 2011-16
10 Djokovic (47.6%)
5 Nadal (23.8%)
2 Murray (9.5%)
2 Wawrinka (9.5%)
1 Federer (4.8%)
1 Cilic (4.8%)

Going just on that, Andy is behind only Novak and Rafa in those two categories and actually has a better conversion rate (28.5%) than Roger (20%) from 2011 to the present.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

nehmeth, a question for you (or anyone): If Andy had a better mental game, how many more Slams do you think he would have won? I can give him maybe 1 or 2 more, but probably not more than that. I just don't think he is as good as the other three.

Think of it this way ED, if Andy had been able to get a better grip on the things he struggles with, he would have been more coachable, probably more amenable to changing the things he needed to in his game... and when pressed he wouldn't feel the need to go back to his "safe place" as the pusher.

He may have won at least two, but that's the sad thing, we will never know.

Excellent point..being more coachable would have paid dividends.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Andy's biggest problem is his mental inferiority on big points/matches compared to other 3
Technically he is maybe 5-10% (tops) worse than his archenemies (half of that goes to his 2nd serve) but mentally he's stuck at "Novak's 2010"
That's why he have "only" 9 finals and "only" 2 wins.
And he got lucky to have Ivan helping him snatch those 2 GS titles and OGM 'cause he didn't mentally collapse in those matches (quite contrary behavior to his "past 2013" game). All in all great career but still unlucky to have 3 ATG's in his time alongside obvious "mental block" when playing them all (except those 3 times... against Djoko in slams and Fed on Olympics).

Good post. One of the biggest reasons for the inferiority on big points is that he wastes so much mental energy leading up to the big points. I mean blaming your box for your s h i t forehand???:clap

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Good stuff, dante1976 - I like the Novak 2010 analogy. I think that is basically right. And I also agree that Andy is about 90-95% of the player the others are.

Out of curiosity, I wanted to see which players had the largest "Slam Final Shares" during the Age of Novak (2011-16). That includes 21 Slams.

Slam Finals: 2011-16
16 Djokovic (76.2%)
9 Nadal (42.9%)
7 Murray (33%)
5 Federer (23.8%)
2 Wawrinka (9.5%)
1 Cilic (4.8%)
1 Nishikori (4.8%)
1 Ferrer (4.8%)

Slam Wins: 2011-16
10 Djokovic (47.6%)
5 Nadal (23.8%)
2 Murray (9.5%)
2 Wawrinka (9.5%)
1 Federer (4.8%)
1 Cilic (4.8%)

Going just on that, Andy is behind only Novak and Rafa in those two categories and actually has a better conversion rate (28.5%) than Roger (20%) from 2011 to the present.

Interestingly, your numbers kind of back of my thread title.." a loser among winners"...

 

[El Dude]

Not to threadjack and talk about Novak, but the most striking number to me is that he's won almost half of all Slams over the last 5+ years. If he wins the FO, it will be exactly half (11 of 22).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Not to threadjack and talk about Novak, but the most striking number to me is that he's won almost half of all Slams over the last 5+ years. If he wins the FO, it will be exactly half (11 of 22).

Also, except for his win over Tsonga in 2008, all ten of his other GS finals were won against a B4 opponent (although Roger is past his prime).

 

[golds girl]

Without getting into too my psychology...

The kid grew up in an untenable marriage where there was a lot of strife before there was a divorce. Then the shooting of his school chums. When you're growing up and spending all your free time on a tennis court, where are you going to let out all that internal turmoil? On the court.

I'm not an Andy fan, but I do feel badly for him when he goes mental out there. Can he somehow move past it? To this point in his career he hasn't. Maybe becoming a Dad and having fresh perspective will silence some of those demons.

All great posts. I watched the match live and I literally cringed everytime he lost a point because I knew that box was going to get cursed out.
I don't know about this baby making him more mellow. They can be equally stressful. I worry about his emotional health.

 

[Great Hands]

The thing about Andy's record in gs finals; look at it this way; Andy has never been the number one player, the number one seed, or the favourite for any particualr slam. in fact, he;s normally been the 3rd or 4th seed, occascially the second. So a lot fo the itme, he's acutaqlly been over-achieving, exceeding his seeding and expectations, just to get to the final. so it's hradly surptsing thsst he's 2-7.

[Andy's mental issues are a bit like someone having a less good fh or bh or someting. but for some reason, they get fixated on more, and people seem to think they should b eeasier to overcome.]

yes, andy is not as good metnalyl as fedalovic (when all in thoer prime). But just looking at it form the ohter perpsecitve which never seems to be dicussed, ever), andy is a better player mentally than anyone else currently playing other than fedalvoic. he has that inetsity that players like tosonga and berdych don't have. and in terms of winning big matches, don't talk to me about warinka until he's got to 9 slam finals and 18 slam semis. stan runs ot and cold, andy always brings the intesity.

Here's a way I've just thought about it: to be a great player, you need the fire, the intensity. Andy has this. You can see it when it walks out on court, and in every point of his matches. It's what separates him from the Berdyches and Tsongas of this world. They don't have it. He does. He's a great player, they aren't.

But in order to be an all-time great player, you need the fire, and the ice. You need the intensity, combined with the calm. Andy doesn't have enough ice - although he has some, just not as much as Fedalovic, or any of the other all-time greats. Watch him come up with brilliant shots, and big first serves, just when he needs them, against all players who aren't Fedalovic the vast majority of the time. No one ever seems to talk about the fact that he does this, but that doesn't just happen. It comes from mental strength, and Andy has more of it than people give him credit for. He also does this at times in matches against Fedalovic, but not enough. Fire but not enough ice, thus he's a great, but not an all-time great.

Fed, Rafa and Novak have plenty of ice on the big points. Nadal has lost his ice on big points, Novak has more ice now than he ever had in his career before.

 

[Great Hands]

To be a great player, you need the fire, the intensity. Andy has this. You can see it when it walks out on court, and in every point of his matches. It's what separates him from the Berdyches and Tsongas of this world. They don't have it. He does. He's a great player, they aren't.

But in order to be an all-time great player, you need the fire, and the ice. You need the intensity, combined with the calm. Andy doesn't have enough ice - although he has some, just not as much as Fedalovic, or any of the other all-time greats. Watch him come up with brilliant shots, and big first serves, just when he needs them, against all players who aren't Fedalovic the vast majority of the time. No one ever seems to talk about the fact that he does this, but that doesn't just happen. It comes from mental strength, and Andy has more of it than people give him credit for. He also does this at times in matches against Fedalovic, but not enough. Fire but not enough ice, thus he's a great, but not an all-time great.

Fed, Novak and Rafa (in prime) all obviously have the fire, but they all also have plenty of ice on the big points. Federer has lost some of the ice on the big points, Nadal has lost his ice on the big points to a spectacular degree, and Novak has more ice now than he ever had in his career before.

 

[Great Hands]

I wouldn't worry about this too much. The good news is that by all accounts from everybody Andy is calm and lovely off the court, apparently his demeanour at times on the court is completely unrecognizable to those who know him as a person off court.

 

[isabelle]

nehmeth, a question for you (or anyone): If Andy had a better mental game, how many more Slams do you think he would have won? I can give him maybe 1 or 2 more, but probably not more than that. I just don't think he is as good as the other three.

I would say a minimum of 4 more.

Agree with you, when Lendl was his coach, the mental aspect seemed to vanish, then Lendl left...and the mental aspect came back strong. he's as talented than the others IMO, it's only in his mind